Goldstone is the author of the forthcoming "Not White Enough: The Long Shameful Road to Japanese American Internment."
As one of its first acts after taking control of the House of Representatives, Republicans chose not to attack inflation, public health needs, a drought that threatens farmland in the rural West, or even the immigration crisis at the southern border, but rather “approved a GOP resolution to create a select subcommittee that Republicans say will launch a far-reaching examination of the agencies and people that investigated Donald Trump.”
The vote to create what Republicans provocatively called the “Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government,” was 221 to 211, with every Democrat opposed, thus dispelling the notion that there is a “moderate” wing of the Republican Party that will resist efforts of the far-right to turn House proceedings into a circus for the next two years.
Chosen to chair this even-handed probe into the persecution of the unfairly maligned former president and his acolytes is that noted advocate of sound governance and fair play, Representative Jim Jordan of Ohio, who is also the incoming chairman of the Judiciary Committee.
Jordan is an obvious choice for a party more interested in attacking their opponents than in enacting legislation to solve problems that they had no small hand in perpetuating. He is described as “a staunch ally of Mr. Trump” and “deeply involved in Mr. Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election.”
On January 5, 2021, Jordan forwarded a text to Mark Meadows, endorsing a crackpot legal theory that would give Mike Pence the authority to block certification of the election, and then voted against certifying it after the January 6 riot. According to the January 6 committee, three days before the Meadows text, on January 2, Jordan “led a conference call in which he, President Trump, and other Members of Congress discussed strategies for delaying the January 6th joint session.”
It is ironic but hardly a surprise that one of Jordan’s pet peeves is what he insists is a plot among federal law enforcement and national security agencies to unfairly target conservatives. And so, he promises a sweeping investigation to uncover details of this perfidious conspiracy by liberals to punish anyone from protesters at school board meetings to Trump himself.
Democrats protested that Jordan and his committee would engage in the very conduct he claims to deplore. Jim McGovern, a Massachusetts Democrat, said, “I call it the McCarthy committee, and I’m not talking about Kevin; I’m talking about Joe.” He added, “This committee is nothing more than a deranged ploy by the MAGA extremists who have hijacked the Republican Party and now want to use taxpayer money to push their far-right conspiracy nonsense.”
"A ploy?” Jordan responded, summoning his full measure of righteous indignation. “It’s not a ploy when the Department of Justice treats parents as terrorists, moms and dads who are simply showing up at a school board meeting to advocate for their son or daughter.” Even more outrageous according to Jordan was that “The government was telling people they couldn’t go to church just a few years ago.”
That Jordan’s fury is selective there can be no doubt, nor that he chose to look away when the Trump administration was committing its worst abuses and when a mob of insurrectionists committed unspeakable acts after breaching the Capitol in the first large scale attack on the building since the War of 1812.
But Jordan is good at looking away. When he was assistant wrestling coach at Ohio State from 1987 to 1995, he was accused of being involved in the cover-up of widespread sexual abuse of young men by then-team doctor Richard Strauss. Eight of the wrestlers have publicly accused Jordan of being aware of the abuse and doing nothing to stop it. One, Dunyasha Yetts, told NBC News of going to Jordan after being abused, but Jordan did nothing. Yetts’s teammate Shawn Dailey corroborated the story.
But the most damning accusations came from Adam DiSabato, who was team captain in the early 1990s. DiSabato, whose brother Mike was among the first whistle-blowers, testified to the Ohio House Civil Justice Committee that Jordan as well as other university officials knowingly ignored Strauss’s systematic sexual abuse of wrestlers. In 2018, DiSabato claimed Jordan begged him to deny the story. He told USA Today, “Jim Jordan called me crying, groveling, begging me to go against my brother, begging me, crying for a half-hour. That’s the kind of cover-up that’s going on there.”
Jordan has, of course, denied the accusations and has not been charged, although he was named in a pending class action lawsuit. Jordan did not comment on the suit but he did have his communications director, Ian Fury, dismiss the charge as “Another lie.”
The point here is not so much to attack Jordan, although his hypocrisy and questionable character are difficult to overlook, but rather to use both the new subcommittee and Jordan’s appointment as its chairman as a reflection of the way in which today’s Republican Party intends to govern.
While certainly both parties pander to their respective bases and promote legislation that can sometimes elevate popularity over practicality, for most of our recent history, party leaders have understood that a functioning democracy has certain limits and those in government must exercise some measure of self-discipline to prevent this fragile system from fracturing.
That discipline and the commitment to perpetuating our system of government seems to have been supplanted in today’s Republican party by an obsession to stay in power by any means possible, even at the risk of destroying what generations of Americans fought and died for.
Since Donald Trump’s victory-for-nihilism election in 2016, many Americans have seemed to perceive the threat that Republicans either ignore or even welcome. For three consecutive national elections since, Republicans underperformed expectations because moderates of both parties pulled the lever for Democrats, albeit in many cases grudgingly.
In 2024, if we wish to ensure that our democracy survives, they will need to do so again.




















A golden tray sits on the Resolute Desk as President Donald Trump speaks during an announcement on American nuclear innovation in the Oval Office at the White House on July 24, 2026, in Washington, D.C. Trump is signing multiple executive orders targeting the nuclear energy sector and easing rules for new reactors and nuclear fuel supply chains.
Trump’s hubris rivals the fallen heroes of ancient Greek mythology
In January, the New York Times asked President Donald Trump if there were any limits on his global powers.
“Yeah,” the president responded, “there is one thing. My own morality. My own mind. It’s the only thing that can stop me.”
That was eight months ago, but fortunately Christopher Nolan’s blockbuster adaptation of “The Odyssey” has made ancient Greek literature newly relevant. Before that window closes, I’d like to talk about hubris.
Today, the term mostly means excessive pride or arrogance. That’s part of what the Greeks meant by it too, but the meaning was a bit richer and more specific. Hubris was an insolent or outrageous act that offended the gods, often because the transgressor was claiming abilities or authorities that solely belonged to supreme beings.
Nolan renamed and slightly modified the concept of xenia for the film, calling it “Zeus’ law.” In the director’s telling, mortals should follow the rules laid out by the gods, specifically the requirement to treat strangers with respect lest they be gods in disguise.
In a sense, hubris is the opposite, or at least the rejection, of xenia. The hubris of the suitors, and at times Odysseus himself, invites punishment by the gods and their mortal instruments.
Which brings me back to Donald Trump. His claim that there are no constraints on his personal power to dictate events on the global stage was one of the greatest expressions of hubris ever uttered by a political leader.
Trump’s claim was obviously false when he made it.
He vowed that he could end the Russia-Ukraine war in 24 hours. He’s proved powerless to make that happen. If he had divine powers to work his will, why would he have balked at implementing his tariffs so often that Wall Street adopted the “TACO trade” term for his deals? “TACO” stands for “Trump always chickens out.”
And why would Trump have made so many embarrassing concessions to China — from rescinding tariffs on Chinese goods to allowing them to buy crucial and incredibly valuable computer chips?
But Trump saw his success at capturing Venezuelan strongman Nicolas Maduro as proof of his ability to launch missiles to the same effect as Zeus’ lightning bolts. Trump believed he was the most powerful man who ever lived.
This is no exaggeration. In March, when the Iran invasion seemed successful, Trump gave a document penned by“Presidential Historian David King” to New York Times reporters Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan purporting to prove that Trump was “the most powerful person to have EVER walked this planet.” King was, in fact, a businessman and occasional caddy for legendary golfer Gary Player.
King compared Trump favorably to many of history’s most powerful, and often heinous, figures: Alexander the Great, Attila the Hun, William the Conqueror, Napoleon Bonaparte, Joseph Stalin, Genghis Khan, Mao Tse Tung, Adolf Hitler and Vladimir Lenin. Many of these men thought they were the most powerful person in the world, too. And many were defeated precisely because they believed it.
At least Napoleon and Hitler had a string of truly impressive victories before they learned the folly of hubris. The limits on Trump’s power have been exposed by far less august forces than the combined might of the allies in World War II or the fearsome Russian winter.
Iran is a comparatively middling power. But the regime’s ability to absorb punishment while imposing its will on the Strait of Hormuz has proved to be a greater constraint on Trump’s power than his morality or mind. We should note that, at least rhetorically, his morality has not proved much of a constraint. He has repeatedly promised to destroy Iranian “civilization” if the regime refuses to capitulate.
But they haven’t — and won’t anytime soon — because the regime’s tolerance for pain far outstrips Trump’s. The combined fear of skyrocketing oil prices, outrage of Gulf state potentates, diminishing weapon supplies and domestic unpopularity is doing the work that international law, congressional oversight and the collective opinion of foreign policy experts can’t or won’t do.
If I considered Trump more heroic than reason and facts could allow, I would say his Sisyphean predicament has the whiff of Greek tragedy to it. Trump is vexed by the fact that the Iranians won’t honor deals or ratify his countless premature claims of victory — giving new meaning to his vow that his presidency would make people tired of winning. It’s almost like they’re out-Trumping Trump.
Things might have gone better if he’d heeded that great Greek tragedian Sophocles: “For Zeus utterly abhors the boasts of a proud tongue.”
____
Jonah Goldberg is editor-in-chief of The Dispatch and the host of The Remnant podcast. His Twitter handle is @JonahDispatch.